Comments on: Univseral Acquires Movie Rights to Dark Horse Comics Library

By: arul vigg

arul vigg — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 03:28:25 +0000

great article well written!!!! and very intricate!!
by arul vigg.

By: Paul

Paul — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:28:03 +0000

Top Dark Horse titles usually anyone can think of, were 20th Century Fox Movies…. So, We ALL know they didn’t get any of those…

They Got X, Ghost and a bunch of other Heroes that cause my sinuses to dislodge scent particles of Die-Cut and Chromium covers along with poly bagged books… Oh the HELL of the early Nineties. (To Dark Horses credit, they did very little of that crap compared to some other publishers…)

By: Omar

Omar — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:56:44 +0000

Preacher is DC.

By: Henrik

Henrik — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:14:28 +0000

Preacher, PREACHER, PREEEACHEEER!

By: Darren J Seeley

Darren J Seeley — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:59:00 +0000

“as well as any material that Dark Horse might acquire on its own”

I”m strongly curious about that myself, because I wonder how it affects DH’s sumbission policies

http://www.darkhorse.com/company/submissions.php#subagree

Now, why Dark Horse. I have some ideas.

First, it will make things smoother if UNiversal decides to continue franchises and needs the Comics plugging – Hellboy, TimeCop and Serenity. It also may quicken the pace of the long limboed Concrete.

Second, New Line Cinema folded. If WB doesn’t want it, here comes a new Mask. Maybe with Jim Carrey and Cameron Diaz back…or perhaps, uh, a more “direct” adaptation.

As for licensing, I think that is a seperate area. So much so that if it really does conflict, some of those titles will soon wrap up within a year or so.

By: Jay

Jay — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 06:40:33 +0000

I think it definitely has potential to make a great movie. But we all know that great stories can become the worst movie depends on the team that is working on the movie=]

http://quietlyloudblog.com/

By: Clinky

Clinky — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 06:07:55 +0000

Here’s the thing. Compared to movies, or TV, comic books make very little money. Even though most of Dark Horse’s comics are creator-owned, I would imagine that Dark Horse won’t publish a comic without some sort of provision to make movie deals and share in the proceeds.

By: Joey

Joey — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 05:52:30 +0000

Fantagraphics, Drawn & Quarterly, Markosia, Top Shelf, Mirage, Aaardvark Vanaheim, Adhouse, Abstract, Ape, Archaia Studio Press, Desperado, Moonstone, Oni Press, Red 5, and even Image are better examples of independent comic publishers.

In terms of Dark Horse’s catalogue other than Sin City, 300, Hellboy, Grendel and Usagi Yojimbo, they also have The Goon, The End League, Rex Mundi, The Mask, The Umbrella Academy, Martha Washington, The Scream, Dead Rider, Speak Of The Devil, Groo The Wanderer, Criminal Macrabe, Fear Agent, Apocalypse Nerd, Big Guy and Rusty the Boy Robot, Hard Boiled, Next Men, Kickback, Madman, The Perhapanauts, Too Much Coffee Man, and a lot more. So I wouldn’t say they don’t have much in terms of their catalogue, but it’s the issue of the fact that Dark Horse dosen’t own any of it. So I guess Dark Horse is acting as more of an intermediate between the creators and the studios.

By: shadopup

shadopup — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 04:20:34 +0000

Oops I meant Drawn and Quarterly is based in Montreal. Still both Fantagraphics and Drawn & Quarterly are more indie than Dark Horse.

By: shadopup

shadopup — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 04:13:59 +0000

I never read any of their comics but most of what I saw on the shelves that they released seemed to be comics based on licensed properties. However, they have published Sin City, 300, Hellboy, Grendel and Usagi Yojimbo which are probably their more well known (not based on a property) titles but wait a minute the first three have already been made into movies.

I don’t understand why Universal would make this deal. What does Dark Horse have that they own?

Fantagraphics is probably more representative of an indie comic company (based out of Montreal too!).